Delhi District Court
Jaipal Singh vs . Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. on 29 November, 2019
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. 1480/2016
Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.
CNR No.DLSW010005492013
1. Jaipal Singh
S/o Sh. Abheram
2. Jaideep
S/o Sh. Jaipal Singh
Both Resident of :
Flat No. 119, Golden Hight,
DDA Multistorey,
Pocket8, Sector12,
Dwarka, New Delhi
3. Jyoti
D/o Sh. Jaipal Singh
W/o Sh. Satyapal Dhayal
R/o H. No. 589, Sector 9 & 11,
Hisar, Haryana.
4. Seema
D/o Sh. Jaipal Singh
W/o Sh. Sandeep Joon
R/o H. No. 22/220, Street No.4,
Mahavir Park, Bahadurgarh,
Haryana ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Mohd. Sayeed (Driver)
R/o 107, MG Road,
Kolkatta
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 1/70
2
Also at :
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
2. Asian Cargo Movers (Owner)
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
Also at :
Off. No.2, First Floor,
DDA Market, Yojna Vihar,
New Delhi
3. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ( Insurer)
503, 5th Floor, Aggarwal Millennium Tower
Netaji Subhash Place,
Pitampura, New Delhi ... Respondents
MACP No. 1553/2016
Balwan Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.
CNR No.DLSW010007292013
1. Balwan Singh
S/o Late Sh. Ram Swaroop
R/o Plot No. 6B/2, Khasra No.52/24/1,
BlockM, Gopal Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi
2. Chand Ram
S/o Sh. Balwan Singh
R/o H. No. 439/29
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 2/70
3
Chhotu Ram Nagar
Model Town,
Rohtak, Haryana
3. Sumitra Devi
W/o Sh. Narender Kumar
R/o H. No. 1037, Sector 13,
Hisar, Haryana
4. Bijender Singh
S/o Sh. Balwan Singh
R/o Plot No. 6B/2, Khasra No.52/24/1,
BlockM, Gopal Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. Mohd. Sayeed (Driver)
R/o 107, MG Road,
Kolkatta
Also at :
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
2. Asian Cargo Movers (Owner)
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
Also at :
Off. No.2, First Floor,
DDA Market, Yojna Vihar,
New Delhi
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 3/70
4
3. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ( Insurer)
503, 5th Floor, Aggarwal Millennium Tower
Netaji Subhash Place,
Pitampura, New Delhi ... Respondents
MACP No. 1554/2016
Virender Kumar Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.
CNR No.DLSW010007302013
1. Virender Kumar
S/o Sh. Om Prakash
R/o Plot No. 12
BlockB, Gopal Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi
2. Kapil Kajla
S/o Sh. Virender Kajla
R/o RZ45B, BlockB
PhaseIII, Prem Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi
3. Manish Kajla
S/o Sh. Virender Kajla
R/o RZ45B, BlockB
PhaseIII, Prem Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi ... Petitioners
V.
1. Mohd. Sayeed (Driver)
R/o 107, MG Road,
Kolkatta
Also at :
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 4/70
5
2. Asian Cargo Movers (Owner)
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
Also at :
Off. No.2, First Floor,
DDA Market, Yojna Vihar,
New Delhi
3. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ( Insurer)
503, 5th Floor, Aggarwal Millennium Tower
Netaji Subhash Place,
Pitampura, New Delhi ... Respondents
MACP No. 1555/2016
Manish Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.
CNR No.DLSW010007312013
Manish
S/o Sh. Virender Kajla
R/o RZ45B, BlockB
PhaseIII, Prem Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Mohd. Sayeed (Driver)
R/o 107, MG Road,
Kolkatta
Also at :
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 5/70
6
2. Asian Cargo Movers (Owner)
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
Also at :
Off. No.2, First Floor,
DDA Market, Yojna Vihar,
New Delhi
3 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ( Insurer)
503, 5th Floor, Aggarwal Millennium Tower
Netaji Subhash Place,
Pitampura, New Delhi ... Respondents
MACP No. 1556/2016
Kapil Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.
CNR No.DLSW010007352013
Kapil
S/o Sh. Virender Kajla
R/o RZ45B, BlockB
PhaseIII, Prem Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Mohd. Sayeed (Driver)
R/o 107, MG Road,
Kolkatta
Also at :
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 6/70
7
2. Asian Cargo Movers (Owner)
17C, Row House,
Surya Vihar, Dundahera
Gurgaon, Haryana
Also at :
Off. No.2, First Floor,
DDA Market, Yojna Vihar,
New Delhi
3. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ( Insurer)
503, 5th Floor, Aggarwal Millennium Tower
Netaji Subhash Place,
Pitampura, New Delhi ... Respondents
Date of institution of MACP No. 1480/16 07.08.2013
Date of institution of MACP No. 1553/16 07.08.2013
Date of institution of MACP No. 1554/16 07.08.2013
Date of institution of MACP No. 1555/16 07.08.2013
Date of institution of MACP No. 1556/16 07.08.2013
Date on which, judgment have been reserved25.11.2019
Date of pronouncement of judgment - 29.11.2019
JUDGMENT:
Vide this common judgment, I shall dispose of four cases bearing MACP No. 1480/16, MACP No.1553 /16, MACP No. 1554/16, MACP No. 1555/16 and MACP No. 1556/16 pertaining to the same road traffic accident, which took place on 17.07.2013.
The first petition (bearing MACP No. 1480/16) u/s 166 & 140 M.V. Act for grant of compensation has been filed on behalf of petitionersJaipal Singh & Ors.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 7/70 8 in respect of death of deceasedJagwanti Devi w/o Sh. Jaipal Singh caused in the road traffic accident on 17.07.2013.
The second petition (bearing MACP No. 1553/16) u/s 166 & 140 M.V. Act for grant of compensation has been filed on behalf of petitionersBalwan Singh & Ors. qua death of deceasedParwati Devi w/o Sh. Balwan Singh caused in the same road traffic accident on 17.07.2013.
The third petition (bearing MACP No. 1554/16) u/s 166 & 140 M.V. Act for grant of compensation has been filed on behalf of petitionersVirender Kumar & Ors. in respect of death of deceasedNirmala Rani w/o Sh. Virender Kumar caused in the road traffic accident on 17.07.2013.
The fourth petition (bearing MACP No. 1555/16) u/s 166 & 140 M.V. Act for grant of compensation qua injuries sustained by him in road traffic accident dated 17.07.2013 has been filed on behalf of petitioner/injured Manish.
The fifth petition (bearing MACP No. 1556/16) u/s 166 & 140 M.V. Act for grant of compensation in respect of injuries sustained by him in road traffic accident dated 17.07.2013 has been filed on behalf of petitioner/injured Kapil.
2. Brief facts as made out from the abovesaid petitions are that on 17.07.2013 at about 7:30 PM, Jagwanti Devi, Parwati Devi and Nirmala Rani and her sons Kapil & Manish were going in a Scorpio from Delhi to Hissar and when they reached near Mundhal under PS Sadar Bhiwani, a Container bearing no. HR 55P 7283 came from opposite side at a very high speed, being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and hit the vehicle of the victims, as a result of which Jagwanti Devi, Parwati Devi and Nirmala Rani sustained fatal injuries and died and petitionersManish & Kapil also sustained injuries in the said accident. It is further MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 8/70 9 stated that accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of driver of the offending vehicle and a case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 512/13 u/s 279/304 A IPC at PS Bhiwani Sadar, Haryana.
In petition bearing MACP No. 1480/16, it has been stated that deceased Jagwanti Devi was aged about 58 years of age at the time of accident and it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.50 lacs alongwith interest @ 18 % per annum from date of filing of petition till realization may be passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
Further, in petition bearing MACP No. 1553/16, it has been stated that deceased Parwati Devi was aged about 65 years of age at the time of accident and it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.50 lacs alongwith interest @ 18 % per annum from date of filing of petition till realization may be passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
In petition bearing MACP No. 1554/16, it has been stated that deceased Nirmala Rani was aged about 38 years of age at the time of accident and it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.50 lacs alongwith interest @ 18 % per annum from date of filing of petition till realization may be passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
Further, in petition bearing MACP No. 1555/16, it has been stated that after accident, petitioner/injuredManish was taken to Sapra hospital, Hissar Haryana and thereafter he remained admitted at Medanta hospital, Gurgaon for the treatment of the injuries sustained by him in the accident and it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.10 lacs alongwith interest @ 18 % per annum from the date of filing of petition till realization may be passed in favour of the petitioner/injured and against the respondents.
Further in petition bearing MACP No. 1556/16, it has been stated that MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 9/70 10 after accident, petitioner/injuredKapil was taken to Sapra hospital, Hissar Haryana and thereafter he remained admitted at Medanta hospital, Gurgaon for the treatment of the injuries sustained by him in the accident and it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.10 lacs alongwith interest @ 18 % per annum from the date of filing of petition till realization may be passed in favour of the petitioner/injured and against the respondents.
3. WS has been filed on behalf of R3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd., wherein it has been stated that the present petitions were not maintainable as the petitioners have suppressed the material particulars to extract compensation from respondent/ insurance company. It is further stated that the present petitions were not maintainable as these were not supported by the documents as required under the law.
Further, in parawise reply, the contents of paras 1 to 7 & 19 to 22 of the petitions have been denied for want of knowledge and contents of paras 16 to 18 are stated to be matter of record. In reply to para 15, it is stated that the vehicle bearing no. HR 55P 7283 was insured with the said respondent/ insurance company vide insurance policy cover note no. 73564825 in the name of Asian Cargo Movers for the period from 31.12.2012 to 30.12.2013. All other averments made in the petition have been denied as incorrect and it has been prayed that the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed with cost.
4. In the instant case, the perusal of record reveals that respondent no. 1 Mohd. Sayeed and respondent no. 2 Asian Cargo Movers have been proceeded against exparte vide order dated 03.09.2014 passed by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 10/70 11
5. In the present cases, since, common question of law and facts were involved in all these cases i.e petition bearing MACP No. 1480/16, MACP No. 1553/16, MACP No. 1554/16, MACP No. 1555/16 and MACP No. 1556/16, the common issues were framed and the same were consolidated for the purpose of recording the evidence by treating the case bearing MACP No. 1480/16 as "Leading Case".
On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed in all these cases :
ISSUES :
1. Whether Jagwanti Devi, Parwati Devi, Nirmala Rani sustained fatal injuries and Manish & Kapil sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 17.07.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. HR 55P 7283 being driven by respondent no. 1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by respondent no. 2 Asian Cargo Movers and insured by respondent no.3 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioners in the above mentioned cases are entitled to claim compensation if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In support of their case, petitioners have examined PW1 Balwan Singh (petitioner no.1 in MACP No. 1553/16), PW2 Jaipal Singh (petitioner no. 1 in MACP No.1480/16), PW3 Virender Kumar (petitioner no.1 in MACP No. 1554/16), PW4 Manish Kajla (petitioner no.3 in MACP No. 1554/16 & petitioner/injured in MACP No. 1555/16) and PW5 Kapil ( petitioner no.2 in MACP No.1554/16 & petitioner/injured in MACP No. 1556/16) and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 11/70 12 the petitioners.
7. In the instant case, no RE have been led on behalf of R3/ insurance company and on 25.05.2019, Ld counsel for R3/ insurance company submitted that no RE was to be led on behalf of the said respondent and accordingly RE on behalf of R3/ insurance company was closed vide order dated 25.05.2019.
8. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and R3/ insurance company and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioners in support of their case. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners and R3/ insurance company.
9. The issuewise findings are as under :
10. ISSUE No. 1Whether Jagwanti Devi, Parwati Devi, Nirmala Rani sustained fatal injuries and Manish & Kapil sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 17.07.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. HR 55P 7283 being driven by respondent no. 1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by respondent no. 2 Asian Cargo Movers and insured by respondent no.3 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...OPP The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioners have examined PW4 Manish Kajla, who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW4/A), wherein it has been stated that on 17.07.2013 at about 7:30 PM, he alongwith his brother Kapil and mother Nirmala MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 12/70 13 Rani as well as Jagwanti Devi & Parwati Devi were going in a Scorpio from Delhi to Hissar and when they reached near Mundhal under PS Sadar Bhiwani, a container bearing no. HR 55P 7283 came from opposite side at a very high speed being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and hit the vehicle of the victims, as a result of which Jagwanti Devi, Parwati Devi and Nirmala Rani sustained fatal injuries and died and he and Kapil also sustained injuries in the said accident.
In respect of this issue no. 1, the petitioners have also examined PW5 Kapil Kajla, who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW5/A) and contents of the said affidavit are almost on the similar lines as that of affidavit (Ex. PW4/A) of PW4 Manish Kajla.
The important fact is that these witnesses i.e. PW4 Manish Kajla and PW5 Kapil Kajla were cross examined on behalf of the respondent/Insurance company, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of these witnesses.
In his cross examination by Ld counsel for R3/ insurance company PW4 stated that he was present at the spot of accident and sustained injury in the accident. PW4 denied the suggestion that he was deposing falsely regarding injuries in the accident. PW4 further denied the suggestion that no such accident happened on that day. PW4 also denied the suggestion that he was not present at the spot of accident or that no one had sustained injuries or died in the accident.
Further, in his cross examination by Ld counsel for R3/ insurance company, PW5 stated that he was aware of the contents of his affidavit. PW5 denied the suggestion that he was deposing falsely regarding injuries in the accident. PW5 further denied the suggestion that no such accident happened on that day. PW5 also denied the suggestion that he was not present at the spot of accident or that no one had sustained injuries or died in the accident.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 13/70 14 In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of the abovesaid witnesses i.e. PW4 & PW5 qua their deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that deceased Jagwanti Devi, Parwati Devi and Nirmala Rani sustained fatal injuries and died and injured Manish and Kapil sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 17.07.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle no. HR 55P 7283, which was being driven by R1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by R2Asian Cargo Movers and insured with R3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
11. ISSUE No. 2Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP The onus to prove this issue in MACP No. 1480/16 was upon the petitioners therein and in order to discharge the said onus, the said petitioners have examined PW2 Jaipal ( petitioner no. 1 in MACP No. 1480/16), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW2/A), wherein it has been stated that deceased Jagwanti Devi was his wife and she was aged about 58 years at the time of accident on 17.07.2013 and she had left behind the petitioners herein as her legal heirs. PW2 further deposed that at the time of accident, his wife was a housewife and all of them were completely dependent upon her gratuitous service. PW2 has also relied upon the documents Ex. PW2/1 to Ex. PW2/2.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 14/70 15 Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that deceased Jagwanti Devi sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident dated 17.07.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of the vehicle no. HR 55P 7283, which was being driven by R1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by R2 Asian Cargo Movers and insured with R3/ IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and as such petitioners, being the LRs of deceased Jagwanti Devi, have become entitled to claim compensation for the death of said deceased in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners/LRs of deceased Jagwanti Devi is ascertained under the following heads :
12. AGE & MULTIPLIER As per her Voter ICard and other documents/ material on record, deceased - Jagwanti Devi was about 58 years of age at the time of accident on 17.7.2013. Hence, the multiplier of '9' is taken in this case.
13. LOSS OF DEPENDENCY In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that at the time of accident, the deceased Jagwanti Devi was married and has left behind four LRs i.e. petitioner no.1 Jaipal Singh (husband), petitioner no.2 Jaideep ( son), petitioner no. 3 Jyoti (daughter) & petitioner no.4 Seema ( daughter).
In these circumstances, in view of the law/guidelines laid down in the case titled as 'Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. DTC & Anr' [ reported as (2009 )6SCC 121] , one fourth (1/4th ) of the income of the deceased is liable to be deducted from her total income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased.
In view of the above and in view of the material on record, the annual MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 15/70 16 contribution of the deceased to the family multiplied by a multiplier as per above guidelines shall give the loss of dependency to the entire family.
In the instant case, the petitioners have not placed on record any evidence, documentary or otherwise, regarding the employment or income of deceased Jagwanti Devi at the time of accident and in absence thereof, the minimum wages prescribed during the relevant period (17.7.2013) i.e Rs. 7,722/p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of dependency in the present case.
In view of the above, the loss of dependency to the family on account of the death of the deceased Jagwanti Devi can be calculated as under:.
a) Income of the deceased : Rs. 7,722/p.m
Jagwanti Devi
b) 10% addition towards future prospects : Rs. 772/
c) 1/4th deduction towards on personal
and living expenses of deceased. : Rs. 2,136/
d) Monthly loss of dependency
(Rs. 7,722/ + Rs.772/ : Rs. 6,358/
Rs. 2,136/)
e) Annual loss of dependency to the
family due to death of deceased : Rs. 76,296/
(Rs.6,358 / x 12)
f) Total loss of dependency to the
family due to death of deceased
( Rs. 76,296 / x 9) : Rs.6,86,664 /
Hence, in view of the above, the total loss of dependency to the family on account of death of the deceased Jagwanti comes to Rs. 6,86,664 / and as such, the petitioners shall be entitled to the said amount i.e Rs. 6,86,664/(Rupees Six MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 16/70 17 Lacs, Eighty Six Thousand, Six Hundred Sixty Four only) as compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
14. LOSS OF ESTATE In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as ' National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. ( reported as 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1720), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded towards the head 'loss of estate'.
15. FUNERAL EXPENSES Further, in terms of the law /guidelines laid down in the case National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded to the petitioners towards ' funeral expenses'.
16. LOSS OF LOVE AND AFFECTION In the instant case, due to the death of deceased Jagwanti Devi, her children i.e petitioner no.2 Jaideep (son) , petitioner no. 3 Jyoti (daughter ) & petitioner no.4 Seema ( daughter) have suffered loss of love and affection. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case and in view of law/guidelines laid down in the case Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram (supra), a sum of Rs.90,000/ (30,000 x 3) is awarded as compensation under the head loss of love and affection .
17. LOSS OF CONSORTIUM In terms of the law/guidelines laid down in the caseNational Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs.40,000/ is awarded to the petitioner MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 17/70 18
- Sh. Jaipal Singh ( husband of the deceased) towards 'loss of consortium'.
18. The break up of compensation that has been awarded in favour of the petitioners have been tabulated as below : S. No. HEAD AMOUNT 1 Loss of dependency Rs. 6,86,664/
2. Loss of love and affection to children & parents Rs. 90,000/ ( 30,000 x 3) 3 Loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/ 4 For funeral expenses Rs.15,000/ 5 Loss of estate Rs.15,000/ TOTAL Rs. 8,46,664/rounded of Rs. 8,47,000/
19. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioners are awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation / award amount i.e Rs. 8,47,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
20. RELIEF IN MACP No.1480/16 (Jaipal SinghVs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 18/70 19 to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.8,47,000 / (Rupees Eight Lacs, Forty Seven Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 07.8.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents .
21. APPORTIONMENT The abovesaid award amount i.e Rs. 8,47,000 / (Rupees Eight Lacs, Forty Seven Thousand only) shall be apportioned amongst the LRs of the deceased Jagwanti Devi in the following manner with proportionate interest.
S. No. Name of the petitioner/relation with deceased Amount
1. Petitioner no.1 Jaipal Singh ( husband) Rs. 3,47,000/
2. Petitioner no.2 Jaideep ( son Rs. 2,00,000/
3. Petitioner no.3 Jyoti ( daughter ) Rs. 1,50,000/
4. Petitioner no.4 Seema (daughter), Rs. 1,50,000/ Total Rs. 8,47,000 /
22. FORMIVA SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 17.07.2013
ii). Name of the deceased : Jagwanti Devi
iii). Age of the deceased : 58 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the deceased: House Wife
v). Income of the deceased : Rs. 7,722/ MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 19/70 20
vi). Name , age and relationship of legal representative of deceased S.No. Name Age Relation with deceased
(i) Jaipal Singh 68 years Husband
(ii) Jaideep 43 years Son
(iii) Jyoti 39 years Daughter
(iv) Seema 37 years Daughter Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 7,722/per month
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) Rs. 772/
9. LessPersonal expenses of the deceased (C) Rs. 2,136/
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 6,358/ [ (A+B)C=D]
11. Annual Loss of dependency ( D x12) Rs 76,296/ 12. Multiplier (E) 9
13. Total loss of dependency (D x 12x E=F) Rs. 6,86,664/
14. Medical Expenses (G)
15. Compensation for loss of love and affection (H) Rs. 90,000/ (30,000 x 3)
16. Compensation for loss of consortium (I) Rs. 40,000/
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral expenses (K) Rs. 15,000/
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 8,46,664/rounded of as (F+G+H+I+J+K=L) Rs. 8,47,000/
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED
21. Interest amount up to the date of award (M) @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 20/70 21
22. Total amount including interest ( L+M) Rs.8,47,000 / + @9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e.07.8.2013 till realization.
23. Award amount released As per table given below
24. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
25. Mode of disbursement of the award amount to By credit in the SB Account of the claimant (s) (Clause 29) the petitioners
26. Next Date for compliance of the award. 08.1.2020 ( Clause 31)
23. Further, the statement of petitioner/LRs of the deceased Jagwanti Devi regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statement of the petitioner/LRs of the deceased & having regard to fact and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No Name Status Amount of Release Amount Amount of FDR Award
1. Jaipal Singh Husband Rs. 3,47,000/ Rs. 47,000/ Rs. 3 lacs be kept in 60 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 60 months in the name of petitioner no.1 Jaipal Singh with cumulative interest
2. Jaideep Son Rs. 2,00,000/ Rs. 20,000/ Rs. 1.8 lacs be kept in 36 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 36 months in the name of petitioner no.2 Jaideep with cumulative interest MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 21/70 22
3. Jyoti Daughter Rs. 1,50,000/ Rs. 15,000/ Rs. 1.35 lacs be kept in 27 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 27 months in the name of petitioner no.3 Jyoti with cumulative interest
4. Seema Daughter Rs. 1,50,000/ Rs. 15,000/ Rs. 1.35 lacs be kept in 27 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 27 months in the name of petitioner no.4 Seema with cumulative interest The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
24. The onus to prove this issue in MACP No. 1553/16 was upon the petitioners therein and in order to discharge the said onus, the said petitioners have examined PW1 Balwan Singh ( petitioner no. 1 in MACP No. 1553/16), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that deceased Parwati Devi was his wife and she was aged about 65 years at the time of accident on 17.07.2013 and she had left behind the petitioners herein as her legal heirs. PW1 further deposed that at the time of accident, his wife was a housewife and all of them were completely dependent upon her gratuitous service. PW1 has also relied upon the document Ex. PW1/1.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 22/70 23 Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that deceased Parwati Devi sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident dated 17.07.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle (Tata 207) no. HR 55P 7283, which was being driven by R1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by R2 Asian Cargo Movers and insured with R3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and as such petitioners, being the LRs of deceased Parwati Devi, have become entitled to claim compensation for the death of said deceased in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners/LRs of deceased Parwati Devi is ascertained under the following heads :
25. AGE & MULTIPLIER As per her Aadhar Card and other documents/ material on record, deceasedParwati Devi was about 67 years of age at the time of accident on 17.7.2013. Hence, the multiplier of '5' is taken in this case.
26. LOSS OF DEPENDENCY In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that at the time of accident, the deceased Parwati Devi was married and has left behind four LRs i.e. petitioner no.1 Balwan Singh (husband), petitioner no.2 Chand Ram ( son ) , petitioner no. 3 Sumitra Devi ( daughter ) & petitioner no.4 Bijiender Singh ( son). In these circumstances, in view of the law/guidelines laid down in the case titled as 'Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. DTC & Anr' [ reported as (2009 ) 6SCC 121] , one fourth (1/4th ) of the income of the deceased is liable to be deducted from her total income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 23/70 24 In view of the above and in view of the material on record, the annual contribution of the deceased to the family multiplied by a multiplier as per above guidelines shall give the loss of dependency to the entire family.
In the instant case, the petitioners have not placed on record any evidence, documentary or otherwise, regarding the employment or income of deceased Parwati Devi at the time of accident and in absence thereof, the minimum wages prescribed during the relevant period (17.7.2013) i.e Rs. 7,722/p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of dependency in the present case.
In view of the above, the loss of dependency to the family on account of the death of the deceased Parwati Devi can be calculated as under:.
a) Income of the deceased : Rs. 7,722/p.m
Parwati Devi
b) Addition towards future prospects : Nil
c) 1/4th deduction towards on personal
and living expenses of deceased. : Rs. 1,930/
d) Monthly loss of dependency
(Rs. 7,722/ + Nil : Rs. 5,792/
Rs. 1,930/)
e) Annual loss of dependency to the
family due to death of deceased : Rs. 69,504/
(Rs.5,792 / x 12)
f) Total loss of dependency to the
family due to death of deceased
( Rs. 69,504 / x 5) : Rs.3,47,520 /
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 24/70 25 Hence, in view of the above, the total loss of dependency to the family on account of death of the deceased Parwati comes to Rs. 3,47,520 / and as such, the petitioners shall be entitled to the said amount i.e Rs. 3,47,520/(Rupees Three Lacs, Forty Seven Thousand, Five Hundred Twenty only) as compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
27. LOSS OF ESTATE In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as ' National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. ( reported as 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1720), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded towards the head 'loss of estate'.
28. FUNERAL EXPENSES Further, in terms of the law /guidelines laid down in the case National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded to the petitioners towards ' funeral expenses'.
29. LOSS OF LOVE AND AFFECTION In the instant case, due to the death of deceased Jagwanti Devi, her children i.e petitioner no.2 Chand Ram (son), petitioner no.3 Sumitra Devi ( daughter ) & petitioner no.4 Bijiender Singh ( son) have suffered loss of love and affection. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case and in view of law/guidelines laid down in the case Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram (supra), a sum of Rs.90,000/ (30,000 x 3) is awarded as compensation under the head loss of love and affection .
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 25/70 26
30. LOSS OF CONSORTIUM In terms of the law/guidelines laid down in the caseNational Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs.40,000/ is awarded to the petitioner
- Sh. Balwan Singh ( husband of the deceased) towards 'loss of consortium'.
31. The break up of compensation that has been awarded in favour of the petitioners have been tabulated as below : S. No. HEAD AMOUNT 1 Loss of dependency Rs. 3,47,520/
2. Loss of love and affection to children & parents Rs. 90,000/ ( 30,000 x 3) 3 Loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/ 4 For funeral expenses Rs.15,000/ 5 Loss of estate Rs.15,000/ TOTAL Rs. 5,07,520/rounded of Rs. 5,08,000/
32. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioners are awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation / award amount i.e Rs. 5,08,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 26/70 27
33. RELIEF IN MACP No.1553/16 (Balwan Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.5,08,000 / (Rupees Five Lacs, Eight Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 07.8.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents .
34. APPORTIONMENT The abovesaid award amount i.e Rs. 5,08,000 / (Rupees Five Lacs, Eight Thousand only) shall be apportioned amongst the LRs of the deceased Parwati Devi in the following manner with proportionate interest.
S. No. Name of the petitioner/relation with deceased Amount
1. Petitioner no.1 Balwan Singh ( husband) Rs. 2,08,000/
2. Petitioner no.2 Chand Ram ( son ) Rs. 1,00,000/
3. Petitioner no.3 Sumitra Devi ( daughter ) Rs. 1,00,000/
4. Petitioner no.4 Bijender Singh (son), Rs. 1,00,000/ Total Rs. 5,08,000 /
35. FORMIVA SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 17.07.2013
ii). Name of the deceased : Parwati Devi MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 27/70 28
iii). Age of the deceased : 67 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the deceased: House Wife
v). Income of the deceased : Rs. 7,722/
vi). Name , age and relationship of legal representative of deceased S.No. Name Age Relation with deceased
(i) Balwan Singh 75 years Husband
(ii) Chand Ram 50 years Son
(iii) Sumitra Devi 45 years Daughter
(iv) Bijender Singh 48 years Son Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 7,722/per month
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) Nil
9. LessPersonal expenses of the deceased (C) Rs. 1,930/
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 5,792/ [ (A+B)C=D]
11. Annual Loss of dependency ( D x12) Rs 69,504/ 12. Multiplier (E) 5
13. Total loss of dependency (D x 12x E=F) Rs. 3,47,520/
14. Medical Expenses (G)
15. Compensation for loss of love and affection (H) Rs. 90,000/ (30,000 x 3)
16. Compensation for loss of consortium (I) Rs. 40,000/
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral expenses (K) Rs. 15,000/
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 5,07,520/rounded of as (F+G+H+I+J+K=L) Rs. 5,08,000/ MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 28/70 29
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED
21. Interest amount up to the date of award (M) @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
22. Total amount including interest ( L+M) Rs. 5,08,000 / + @9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e.07.8.2013 till realization.
23. Award amount released As per table given below
24. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
25. Mode of disbursement of the award amount to By credit in the SB Account of the claimant (s) (Clause 29) the petitioners
26. Next Date for compliance of the award. 08.1.2020 ( Clause 31)
36. Further, the statement of petitioner/LRs of the deceased Parwati Devi regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statement of the petitioner/LRs of the deceased & having regard to fact and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No Name Status Amount of Release Amount Amount of FDR Award
1. Balwan Singh Husband Rs. 2,08,000/ Rs. 28,000/ Rs. 1.8 lacs be kept in 36 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 36 months in the name of petitioner no.1 Balwan Singh with cumulative interest MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 29/70 30
2. Chand Ram Son Rs. 1,00,000/ Rs. 10,000/ Rs. 90,000/ be kept in 18 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/ each for the period from one month to 18 months in the name of petitioner no.2 Chand Ram with cumulative interest
3. Sumita Devi Daughter Rs. 1,00,000/ Rs. 10,000/ Rs. 90,000/ be kept in 18 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/ each for the period from one month to 18 months in the name of petitioner no.3 Sumitra Devi with cumulative interest
4. Bijender Singh Son Rs. 1,00,000/ Rs. 10,000/ Rs. 90,000/ be kept in 18 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/ each for the period from one month to 18 months in the name of petitioner no.3 Bijiender Singh with cumulative interest The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
37. The onus to prove this issue in MACP No. 1554/16 was upon the petitioners therein and in order to discharge the said onus, the said petitioners have examined PW3 Virender Kumar ( petitioner no. 1 in MACP No. 1554/16), who has MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 30/70 31 filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW3/A), wherein it has been stated that deceased Nirmala Rani was his wife and she was aged about 38 years at the time of accident on 17.07.2013 and she had left behind the petitioners herein as her legal heirs. PW3 further deposed that at the time of accident, his wife was a housewife and all of them were completely dependent upon her gratuitous service. PW3 has also relied upon the documents Ex. PW3/1.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that deceased Nirmala Rani sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident dated 17.07.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle (Tata 207) no. HR 55P 7283, which was being driven by R1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by R2 Asian Cargo Movers and insured with R3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and as such petitioners, being the LRs of deceased Nirmala Rani, have become entitled to claim compensation for the death of said deceased in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners/LRs of deceased Nirmala Rani is ascertained under the following heads :
38. AGE & MULTIPLIER As per her School Certificate and other documents/ material on record, deceased - Nirmala Rani was about 40 years of age at the time of accident on 17.7.2013. Hence, the multiplier of '15' is taken in this case.
39. LOSS OF DEPENDENCY In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that at the time of accident, the deceased Nirmala Rani was married and MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 31/70 32 has left behind three LRs i.e. petitioner no.1 Virender Kumar (husband), petitioner no.2 Kapil Kajla (son) & petitioner no.3 Manish Kajla (son) . In these circumstances, in view of the law/guidelines laid down in the case titled as 'Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. DTC & Anr' [ reported as (2009 )6SCC 121] , one third (1/3rd ) of the income of the deceased is liable to be deducted from her total income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased.
In view of the above and in view of the material on record, the annual contribution of the deceased to the family multiplied by a multiplier as per above guidelines shall give the loss of dependency to the entire family.
In the instant case, the petitioners have not placed on record any evidence, documentary or otherwise, regarding the employment or income of deceased Nirmala Rani at the time of accident and in absence thereof, the minimum wages prescribed during the relevant period (17.7.2013) i.e Rs. 7,722/p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of dependency in the present case.
In view of the above, the loss of dependency to the family on account of the death of the deceased Nirmala Rani can be calculated as under:.
a) Income of the deceased Rs. 7,722/p.m
Nirmala Rani
b) 40% addition towards future prospects : Rs. 3,088/
c) 1/3rd deduction towards on personal
and living expenses of deceased. : Rs. 3,603/
d) Monthly loss of dependency
(Rs. 7,722/ + Rs.3,088/ : Rs. 7,207/
Rs.3,603/)
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 32/70 33
e) Annual loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased : Rs. 86,484/ (Rs.7,207 / x 12)
f) Total loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased ( Rs. 86,484 / x 15) : Rs.12,97,260 / Hence, in view of the above, the total loss of dependency to the family on account of death of the deceased Nirmala Rani comes to Rs. 12,97,260 / and as such, the petitioners shall be entitled to the said amount i.e Rs. 12,97,260/(Rupees Twelve Lacs, Ninety Seven Thousand, Two Hundred Sixty only) as compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
40. LOSS OF ESTATE In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as ' National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. ( reported as 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1720), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded towards the head 'loss of estate'.
41. FUNERAL EXPENSES Further, in terms of the law /guidelines laid down in the case National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded to the petitioners towards ' funeral expenses'.
42. LOSS OF LOVE AND AFFECTION In the instant case, due to the death of deceased Jagwanti Devi , her children i.e petitioner no.2 Kapil Kajla ( son ) & petitioner no. 3 Manish Kajla MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 33/70 34 (son) have suffered loss of love and affection. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case and in view of law/guidelines laid down in the case Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram (supra), a sum of Rs.60,000/ (30,000 x 2) is awarded as compensation under the head loss of love and affection .
43. LOSS OF CONSORTIUM In terms of the law/guidelines laid down in the caseNational Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs.40,000/ is awarded to the petitioner
- Sh. Jaipal Singh ( husband of the deceased) towards 'loss of consortium'.
44. The break up of compensation that has been awarded in favour of the petitioners have been tabulated as below : S. No. HEAD AMOUNT 1 Loss of dependency Rs. 12,97,260/
2. Loss of love and affection to children & parents Rs. 60,000/ ( 30,000 x 2) 3 Loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/ 4 For funeral expenses Rs.15,000/ 5 Loss of estate Rs.15,000/ TOTAL Rs. 14,27,260/ rounded of as Rs. 14,27,500/
45. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 34/70 35 regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioners are awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation / award amount i.e Rs. 14,27,500/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
46. RELIEF IN MACP No. 1554/16 ( Virender Kumar Vs. Mohd.
Sayeed & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs. 14,27,500 / (Rupees Fourteen Lacs, Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 07.8.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents .
47. APPORTIONMENT The abovesaid award amount i.e Rs. 14,27,500 / (Rupees Fourteen Lacs, Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred only) shall be apportioned amongst the LRs of the deceased Nirmala Rani in the following manner with proportionate interest.
S. No. Name of the petitioner/relation with deceased Amount
1. Petitioner no.1 Virender Kumar ( husband) Rs. 7,27,500/
2. Petitioner no.2 Kapil Kajla ( son) Rs. 3,50,000/
3. Petitioner no.3 Manish Kajla ( son ) Rs. 3,50,000/ Total Rs. 14,27,500 / MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 35/70 36
48. FORMIVA SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 17.07.2013
ii). Name of the deceased : Nirmala Rani
iii). Age of the deceased : 40 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the deceased: House Wife
v). Income of the deceased : Rs. 7,722/
vi). Name , age and relationship of legal representative of deceased S.No. Name Age Relation with deceased
(i) Virender Kumar 49 years Husband
(ii) Kapil Kajla 24 years Son
(iii) Manish Kajla 22 years Son Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 7,722/per month
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) Rs. 3,088/
9. LessPersonal expenses of the deceased (C) Rs. 3,603/
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 7,207/ [ (A+B)C=D]
11. Annual Loss of dependency ( D x12) Rs 86,484/ 12. Multiplier (E) 15
13. Total loss of dependency (D x 12x E=F) Rs. 12,97,260/
14. Medical Expenses (G)
15. Compensation for loss of love and affection (H) Rs. 60,000/ (30,000 x 2) MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 36/70 37
16. Compensation for loss of consortium (I) Rs. 40,000/
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral expenses (K) Rs. 15,000/
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 14,27,260/rounded of as (F+G+H+I+J+K=L) Rs. 14,27,500/
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED
21. Interest amount up to the date of award (M) @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
22. Total amount including interest ( L+M) Rs.14,27,500/ + @9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e.07.8.2013 till realization.
23. Award amount released As per table given below
24. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
25. Mode of disbursement of the award amount to By credit in the SB Account of the claimant (s) (Clause 29) the petitioners
26. Next Date for compliance of the award. 08.1.2020 ( Clause 31)
49. Further, the statement of petitioner/LRs of the deceased Nirmala Rani regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statement of the petitioner/LRs of the deceased & having regard to fact and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No Name Status Amount of Release Amount of FDR Award Amount
1. Virender Husband Rs. 7,27,500/ Rs. 77,500/ Rs. 6.5 lacs be kept in 130 FDRs of Kumar Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 130 months in the name of petitioner no.1 Virender Kumar with cumulative interest MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 37/70 38
2. Kapil Kajla Son Rs. 3,50,000/ Rs. 35,000/ Rs. 3.15 lacs be kept in 63 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 63 months in the name of petitioner no.2 Kapil Kajla with cumulative interest
3. Manish Son Rs. 3,50,000/ Rs. 35,000/ Rs. 3.15 lacs be kept in 63 FDRs of Kajla Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 63 months in the name of petitioner no.2 Kapil Kajla with cumulative interest The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
50. The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No.1555/16 was upon the petitioner/ injuredManish Kajla and in order to discharge the said onus, petitioner/injured Manish Kajla has examined himself as PW4 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW4/A), wherein it has been stated that he has received injuries in the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing no. HR55P7283. PW4 further deposed that after the accident, he was taken to Sapra hospital, Hisar, Haryana and he has spent Rs.60,000/ on medical treatment and Rs.30,000/each on conveyance and special diet. PW4 has also relied upon the documents as Ex. PW4/1 ( colly.).
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/injured Manish Kajla sustained injuries in motor MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 38/70 39 vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. HR55P 7283 which was being driven by R1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by R2 Asian Cargo Movers and insured with R3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, petitioner/injuredManish Kajla has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injured Manish Kajla is ascertained under the following heads :
51. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the treatment record/MLC pertaining to Sapra Hospital, Hisar, Haryana, petitioner/ injured Manish Kajla has suffered lacerated wound and multiple abrasions, however therein the nature of injury have not been specified. Further, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has not placed/ proved on record any document to show that he had sustained any grievous injury in the accident and in absence thereof, the nature of injuries suffered by the petitioner/injured Manish Kajla in the accident in the instant case, have to be taken as 'simple'.
Further, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured Manish Kajla has not suffered any temporary or permanent disability due to the injuries sustained by his in the accident in this case.
52. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record,after the accident, petitioner/injured Manish Kajla was taken to Sapra hospital, Hisar, Haryana for the treatment of the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case .
Further, in regard to the abovesaid treatment undergone by him, MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 39/70 40 petitioner/injured Manish Kajla has placed on record the medical bills/ receipts, amounting to Rs.15,510/. There is no reason to doubt the said bills/receipts. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 15,510/ and accordingly , the petitioner/ injured Manish Kajla is awarded the said amount i.e Rs. 15,510 /(Rupees Fifteen Thousand, Five Hundred Ten Only ) towards medicines and medical treatment.
53. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, the petitioner/injured has stated that he was entitled to expenses towards conveyance and special diet, however, no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/injured Manish Kajla has only suffered the injuries , which were 'simple' in nature. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, it is evident that petitioner/injured would not have incurred any expenditure on conveyance or special diet as injuries sustained by him in the accident were simple in nature and as such , he would not have required any follow up visits to the hospital or special diet. Hence, the petitioner/injured shall not be entitled to any compensation under these heads in the instant case.
54. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 40/70 41
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, petitioner/injured Manish Kajla has only suffered the injuries, which were 'simple' in nature. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 5649 51 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident and as such , a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) is awarded to the petitioner/ injured towards the head "pain & sufferings". In addition to this, the petitioner/ injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs.5,000/ (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
55. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injured Manish Kajla is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees)
1. Medicine& Treatment Rs, 15,510/
2. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 20,000/
3. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 5,000/ Total Rs. 40,510/ rounded of as Rs. 41,000/
56. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 41/70 42 regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner/injured is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 41,000/ from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
57. RELIEF IN MACP No. 1555 /16 (Manish Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.41,000/ (Rupees Forty One Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 07.8.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/ injured-Manish Kajla and against the respondents.
58. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 17.7.2013
ii). Name of the injured : Manish Kajla
iii). Age of the injured : 22 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured :
vi). Nature of injury : Simple
vii). Medical treatment taken : Sapra Hospital, Hisar, Haryana.
by the injured MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 42/70 43
viii). Period of hospitalization :
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 15,510/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance
(iii) Expenditure on special diet
(iv) Cost of attendant/physiotherapist
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 5,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships,
disappointment, frustration, mental stress
dejectment and unhappiness in future life
etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature N.A of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 43/70 44
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 40,510/ rounded of as Rs. 41,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 41,000// + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured. 21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 08.1.2020 ( Clause 31)
59. Further,the statement of petitioner/injuredManish Kajla regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case , the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Award Release Amount Amount /Period of FDR
1. Manish Injured Rs. 41,000/ Rs. 5,000/ Rs. 36,000/ be kept in 9 FDRs of Rs. 4,000/ each for the period from one month to 9 months in the name of petitioner/ injured with cumulative interest.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 44/70 45 The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
60. The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No.1556/16 was upon the petitioner/injuredKapil and in order to discharge the said onus, petitioner/injured Kapil Kajla has examined himself as PW5 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW5/A), wherein it has been stated that he has received injuries in the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing no. HR55P7283. PW5 further deposed that after the accident, he was taken to Sapra hospital, Hisar, Haryana and thereafter he was admitted in Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon from 18.7.2013 to 20.7.2013. PW5 deposed that at the time of accident, he was doing private service and was earning Rs. 15,000/ p.m. PW5 further deposed that he has spent Rs.2 lacs on medical treatment and Rs.30,000/each on conveyance and special diet. PW5 has also relied upon the documents as Ex. PW5/1 ( colly.).
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/injured Kapil Kajla sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. HR55P 7283 which was being driven by R1 Mohd. Sayeed, owned by R2 Asian Cargo Movers and insured with R3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, petitioner/injured Kapil Kajla has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injured Kapil Kajla is ascertained under the following heads :
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 45/70 46
61. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record/discharge summary pertaining to Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon petitioner/injuredKapil Kajla is a case of fracture humerus right.
Further, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has not filed on record any document to show that he has suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case.
62. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Kapil Kajla has undergone treatment at Sapra Hospital, Hisar and Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon , where he remained admitted from 18.7.2013 to 20.7.2013.
Further, in regard to the abovesaid treatment undergone by him, petitioner/injured Kapil Kajla has placed on record the medical bills/ receipts, amounting to Rs. 6,750/. There is no reason to doubt the said bills/receipts. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 6,750/ and accordingly , the petitioner/ injured Kapil Kajla is awarded the said amount i.e Rs.6,750 /(Rupees Six Thousand, Seven Hundred Fifty Only ) towards medicines and medical treatment.
63. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Kapil Kajla is a case of fracture humerus right. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital/doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 46/70 47 It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that he has spent Rs. 30,000/ each on conveyance and special diet, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by him, the petitioner/ injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs.15,000/ (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
64. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injuredKapil Kajla stated that at the time of accident, he was doing private service and was earning Rs. 15,000/ p.m. however, no documentary evidence in this regard has been placed on record and in the absence thereof, the minimum wages during the relevant period (17.7.2013) i.e Rs. 7,722/ p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of income to the petitioner/injured.
In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered fracture humerus right and has remained hospitalized for about two days. Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken about three months for the petitioner/injured to recover from the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner / MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 47/70 48 injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 7,722/ x 3= Rs. 23,166/ (Rupees Twenty Three Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two only) under the head ' Loss of Income'.
65. ATTENDANT CHARGES In the present case, it has been stated that the petitioner/injured has incurred expenses on attendant , however neither the said attendant has been examined nor any documentary proof regarding the payment being made to the abovesaid attendant has been brought on record by the petitioner/ injured in this case.
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner / injured Kapil Kajla is a case of fracture humerus right and he remained hospitalized for about two days due to the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances, the petitioner/ injured must have required the services of attendant for about three months. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner/injured would have also needed an attendant to look after him, even if the gratuitous services were rendered by some or the other of his family members. In the case titled as "Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. V. Lalita" (reported as AIR 1981 Delhi 558), it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that a victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous services rendered by some of the family members.
In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 4,000 X 3 = Rs. 12,000/ (Rupees Twelve Thousand Only) towards 'Attendant Charges'.
66. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 48/70 49 factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has suffered fracture humerus right and has remained hospitalized for about two days due to the said injuries sustained by him. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs.70,000/ ( Rupees Seventy Thousand only) is awarded to the petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings".
67. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the loss of enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/ injured was about 21 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered fracture humerus right and was hospitalized for about two days due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/ ( Rupees Fifty Thousand only ) as compensation towards loss of MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 49/70 50 enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner/ injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
68. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injured Kapil Kajla is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs. 6,750/
2. Conveyance Rs. 10,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 15,000/
4. Attendant Charges Rs. 12,000/
5. Loss of Income Rs. 23,166/
6. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 70,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 50,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 20,000/ Total Rs. 2,06,916/ rounded of as Rs. 2,07,000/
69. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner/injured is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 2,07,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 50/70 51
70. RELIEF IN MACP No. 1556/16 ( Kapil Kajla Vs. Mohd.
Sayeed & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.2,07,000/ (Rupees Two Lacs, Seven Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 07.8.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured- Kapil Kajla and against the respondents .
71. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 17.7.2013
ii). Name of the injured : Kapil Kajla
iii). Age of the injured : 21 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private service (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 7,722/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Sapra Hospital, Hisar and Medanta by the injured Hospital,Gurgaon
viii). Period of hospitalization : About two days
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 6,750/ MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 51/70 52
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 10,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 15,000/
(iv) Attendant Charges Rs. 12,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 23,166/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any special treatment or aid to the injured for the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 20,000/ shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 70,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 50,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships, disappointment, frustration, mental stress dejectment and unhappiness in future life etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature N.A of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 2,06,916/ rounded of as Rs. 2,07,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 52/70 53 07.8.2013 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 2,07,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 07.8.2013 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured. 21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 08.1.2020 ( Clause 31)
72. Further, the statement of petitioner/injuredKapil Kajla regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Award Release Amount Amount /Period of FDR
1. Kapil Kajla Injured Rs. 2,07,000/ Rs. 17,000/ Rs.1.9 lacs be kept in 38 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/ each for the period from one month to 38 months in the name of petitioner/ injured with cumulative interest.
The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 53/70 54
73. LIABILITY ( In all the cases bearing MACP No. 1480/16 , MACP No. 1553/16, MACP No. 1554/16, MACP No.1555/16 & MACP No. 1556/16) The offending vehicle bearing no. HR55P7283 was being driven by respondent no.1Mohd. Sayeed , owned by respondent no.2 Asian Cargo Movers and was insured with respondent no.3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, respondent no. 3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd being the 'principal tort feasor', shall be liable to pay the awarded amount to the petitioners in all these cases bearing MACP No. 1480/16, MACP No. 1553/16, MACP No. 1554/16, MACP No.1555/16 & MACP No. 1556/16.
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
74. In all these cases bearing MACP No. 1480/16, MACP No. 1553/16, MACP No. 1554/16, MACP No.1555/16 & MACP No. 1556/16, the award amounts shall be deposited / transferred by respondent no. 3/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd in the Account No. 37665510911 of 'MACT (SouthWest), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi ' at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS under intimation, with proof of notice to the claimant/petitioners and their counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
75. Petitioner Jaipal Singh ( petitioner no.1 in MACP No.1480/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No.91092010047897 at Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. SYNB0009109), wherein it has been endorsed that "No Cheque Book and Debit Card issued in this account".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Jaipal Singh that the MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 54/70 55 abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 91092010047897 of petitioner Jaipal Singh at Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerJaipal Singh, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Jaipal Singh .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Jaipal Singh without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Jaipal Singh and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Jaipal Singh .
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 55/70 56 Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Jaipal Singh to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
76. Petitioner Jaideep (petitioner no.2 in MACP No.1480/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No.91092610000249 at Syndicate Bank, Sector 12A, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. SYNB0009109), wherein it has been endorsed that "No Cheque Book or Debit Card to be issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Jaideep that the above said cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 91092610000249 of petitioner Jaideep at Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerJaideep, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Jaideep .
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 56/70 57 Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Jaideep without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Jaideep and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Jaideep.
Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Jaideep to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
77. Petitioner Jyoti ( petitioner no.3 in MACP No.1480/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 0203010100015175 at Punjab National Bank, Sector 9& 11, Hissar Haryana (IFSC Code No. PUNB0200200), wherein it has been endorsed that "No Cheque Book or No ATM/Debit Card to be issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Jyoti that the above said cash amount may be transferred to her aforesaid SB Account at Punjab National Bank, Sector 9& 11, Hissar Haryana .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 0203010100015175 of petitioner Jyoti at Punjab National Bank, Sector 9& 11, Hissar Haryana and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 57/70 58 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Punjab National Bank, Sector 9& 11, Hissar Haryana is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerJyoti, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Jyoti .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Jyoti without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Punjab National Bank, Sector 9& 11, Hissar Haryana is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Jyoti and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Jyoti.
Punjab National Bank, Sector 9& 11, Hissar Haryana shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Jyoti to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
78. Petitioner Seema ( petitioner no.4 in MACP No.1480/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 520101253545391 at Corporation Bank,0477, Bahadur Garh, Haryana (IFSC Code No. CORP0000477), wherein it has been endorsed that " Customer has requested us not to issue any ATM Card /Cheque Book ".
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 58/70 59 It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Seema that the above said cash amount may be transferred to her aforesaid SB Account at Corporation Bank,0477, Bahadur Garh, Haryana .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 520101253545391 of petitioner Seema at Corporation Bank,0477, Bahadur Garh, Haryana and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Corporation Bank,0477, Bahadur Garh, Haryana is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerSeema, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Seema .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Seema without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Corporation Bank,0477, Bahadur Garh, Haryana is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Jyoti and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Seema.
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 59/70 60 Corporation Bank,0477, Bahadur Garh, Haryana shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Seema to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
79. Petitioner Balwan Singh ( petitioner no.1 in MACP No.1553/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 3670642013 at Central Bank of India, Mitrau, Najafgarh, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. CBIN0282120), wherein it has been endorsed that "No Cheque Book No ATM issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Balwan Singh that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Central Bank of India, Mitrau, Najafgarh, New Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 3670642013 of petitioner Balwan Singh at Central Bank of India, Mitrau, Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Central Bank of India, Mitrau, Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerBalwan Singh, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 60/70 61 shall be provided to petitioner Balwan Singh .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Balwan Singh without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Central Bank of India, Mitrau, Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Balwan Singh and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitionerBalwan Singh .
Central Bank of India, Mitrau, Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Balwan Singh to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
80. Petitioner Chand Ram ( petitioner no.2 in MACP No.1553/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 1533010035097 at United Bank of India, Rohtak ,Haryana (IFSC Code No. UTBI0RTK781), wherein it has been endorsed that "No Cheque Book No ATM issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Chand Ram that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at United Bank of India, Rohtak ,Haryana.
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 1533010035097 of petitioner Chand Ram at United Bank of India, Rohtak ,Haryana and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 61/70 62 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, United Bank of India, Rohtak ,Haryana is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerChand Ram, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Chand Ram .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Chand Ram without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid United Bank of India, Rohtak ,Haryana is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Chand Ram and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Chand Ram .
United Bank of India, Rohtak ,Haryana shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Chand Ram to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
81. Petitioner Sumitra Devi ( petitioner no.3 in MACP No.1553/16) has produced the passbook of her SB Account No. 3292000108021929 at Punjab National Bank, Hissar , Haryana (IFSC Code No. PUNB0329200), wherein it has been endorsed that "No Cheque Book or No ATM to be issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Sumitra Devi that the MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 62/70 63 abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to her aforesaid SB Account at Punjab National Bank, Hissar , Haryana.
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 3292000108021929 of petitioner Sumitra Devi at Punjab National Bank, Hissar , Haryana and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Punjab National Bank, Hissar , Haryana is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerSumitra Devi, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Sumitra Devi .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Sumitra Devi without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Punjab National Bank, Hissar , Haryana is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Sumitra Devi and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Sumitra Devi .
Punjab National Bank, Hissar , Haryana shall permit account holder i.e MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 63/70 64 petitioner Sumitra Devi to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
82. Petitioner Bijender Singh ( petitioner no.4 in MACP No.1553/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 2742101016947 at Canara Bank,Najafgarh, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. CNRB0002742), wherein it has been endorsed that "ATM Card & Cheque Book not issued in this account ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Bijender Singh that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Canara Bank,Najafgarh, New Delhi.
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 2742101016947 of petitioner Bijender Singh at Canara Bank,Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Canara Bank,Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerBijender Singh, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Bijender Singh .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 64/70 65 encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Bijender Singh without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Canara Bank,Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Bijender Singh and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Bijender Singh.
Canara Bank,Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Bijender Singh to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
83. Petitioner Virender Kumar ( petitioner no.1 in MACP No.1554/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 2742101016813 at Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. CNRB0002742), wherein it has been endorsed that "ATM Card & Cheque Book not issued in this account ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Virender Kumar that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Canara Bank,Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi.
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 2742101016813 of petitioner Virender Kumar at Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 65/70 66 Manager, Canara Bank,Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerVirender Kumar, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Virender Kumar .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Virender Kumar without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Virender Kumar and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Virender Kumar.
Canara Bank,Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Virender Kumar to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
84. Petitioner Manish Kajla ( petitioner no.2 in MACP No.1554/16 and petitioner/injured in MACP No.1555/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 2742101016815 at Canara Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. CNRB0002742), wherein it has been endorsed that "ATM Card & Cheque Book not issued in this account ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Manish Kajla that the MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 66/70 67 abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Canara Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi.
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 2742101016815 of petitioner Manish Kajla at Canara Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Canara Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitionerManish Kajla, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Manish Kajla .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Manish Kajla without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Canara Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Manish Kajla and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Manish Kajla.
Canara Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 67/70 68 petitioner Manish Kajla to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
85. PetitionerKapil Kajla ( petitioner no.3 in MACP No.1554/16 and petitioner/injured in MACP No.1556/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 2742101016814 at Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. CNRB0002742), wherein it has been endorsed that "ATM Card & Cheque Book not issued in this account ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner Kapil Kajla that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi.
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 2742101016814 of petitioner Kapil Kajla at Canara Bank,Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner Kapil Kajla, as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 68/70 69 shall be provided to petitioner Kapil Kajla .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Kapil Kajla without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Kapil Kajla and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Kapil Kajla.
Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Kapil Kajla to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
86. The insurance company shall inform the petitioners as well as their counsels through registered post that the award amount is being transferred/ deposited so as to facilitate the petitioner/injured to know about the deposit in the account.
Certified copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi and Manager,Syndicate Bank, Sector12A, Dwarka, New Delhi, Manager, Punjab National Bank, Sector 9& 11, Hissar Haryana, Manager,Corporation Bank,0477, Bahadur Garh, Haryana, Manager,Central Bank of India, Mitrau, Najafgarh, New Delhi, Manager,United Bank of India, Rohtak ,Haryana, Manager Punjab National Bank, Hissar , Haryana and Manager ,Canara Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi, for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also sent through e.mail to Sh.Rajan Singh, MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 69/70 70 Assistant General Manager ( Nodal Officer), State Bank of India at his email ID :
[email protected] in terms of Order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2003.
Certified copy of this award be given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/ their counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company.
Certified copy of this award be also sent to the concerned Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate and Delhi State Legal Services Authority.
The main judgment be placed in the file pertaining to the leading/ main case bearing MACP No. 1480/16 and the copies thereof be placed in the files of connected cases bearing MACP No. 1553/16, MACP No. 1554/16, MACP No.1555/16 & MACP No. 1556/16 .
Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate misc. files and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 08.1.2020.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 29.11.2019) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
29.11.2019
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2019.11.29
16:19:51
+0530
MACP Nos. 1480, 1553,1554, 1555 & 1556/16 Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohd. Sayeed & Ors. 70/70